|
Consuming Our Way to Unhappiness
By Terrence McNally
12/01/08 "AlterNet" -- Everywhere we turn lately, ads --
holiday, post-holiday, and year-end -- have been encouraging us
to shop in a concerted and somewhat desperate effort to salvage
the economy. But where does all the stuff we're buying actually
come from?
Over the last few weeks I've received a number of emails
encouraging me to watch The Story of Stuff, an online
video that asks and answers that question. With amusing graphics
and plenty of humor, host Annie Leonard delivers a complex
analysis in an audience-friendly tone. It's produced by Free
Range Studios, creators of The Meatrix, the wildly
popular animated short about factory farming.
An expert in international sustainability and environmental
health issues, Annie Leonard has spent many years investigating
factories and dumps around the world. She has worked with Health
Care Without Harm, Essential Information and Greenpeace
International, and is currently coordinator of the Funders
Workgroup for Sustainable Production and Consumption.
Terrence McNally: How did The Story of Stuff
happen? This is not the kind of work you've done before. What
led you to this action?
Annie Leonard: I'm fortunate enough to have been able
to spend literally 20 years visiting factories all over the
world where our stuff is made as well as where our stuff is
dumped. Doing that has given me a kind of social neurosis where
I cannot hold an item without imagining its upstream and
downstream life: where it came from and where it's going. Going
through life in this way is actually incredibly illuminating, so
I wanted other people to join me in ...
TM: -- In your neurosis!
AL: Yes exactly, so I would be less lonely.
I wanted other people to join me in thinking about where all
this stuff in our life comes from, where it goes, and how we --
as well as communities on the other side of the world -- are
paying a price for our excessive consumerism.
TM: Tell people a bit about it. First of all, how long
is it?
AL: It's a 20-minute film, but really fast, I don't
even take a breath.
TM: So it's not a two- or three-minute clip people can
watch on impulse. Twenty minutes calls for a bit more
commitment. How did you decide on the length and on the internet
as the primary or initial venue?
AL: Yes, it's longer than a TV commercial, so it
requires some actual interest in hearing about these issues. The
film is based on an hour-long live presentation that we
condensed. We chose to distribute it over the internet to
disseminate it far and wide, and to allow people to see it for
free. We knew that it would be more challenging to engage people
online than in person, so we thought 20 minutes was a good
compromise.
TM: What's the message?
AL: The message is a number of things. One, there's a
cost to this excessive consumption. There's an environmental
cost, there's a social cost -- and there's a personal happiness
cost. This is what's really interesting. A lot of people think
buying all this stuff is making us happier, but recent data has
come out showing that it's not so. So we're trashing the planet,
we're trashing communities -- and we're not even having fun. If
we were at least having fun, we might want to reconsider. But
it's not even fun anymore, so we need to rethink how we make,
use and relate to the stuff in our lives.
TM: In the book Deep Economy, Bill McKibben
pointed out that the happiest Americans have ever shown up on
surveys was in the mid '50s, and that we are much less happy
now. He concludes that our loss of community cannot be made up
for by any gain in material goods. That's the U.S. -- is this a
global phenomenon?
AL: It's increasingly global. We export our waste, we
export our dirty technologies, but I'd say the most dangerous
thing that we export is our way of living.
TM: This appetite.
AL: As other countries get on board the throw away,
disposable, consumption-above-all mentality, they're seeing the
erosion of their communities, of their social fabric, and of
their civic life. This then leads increasingly to social
isolation and loneliness.
TM: If consumption-above-all is not making us happier,
why do we buy into it, as it were?
AL: There are a number of different forces driving our
excessive consumption. Perhaps the most significant one is the
advertising industry, which spends billions of dollars each year
in the U.S. alone, aimed at creating desire for new stuff. If
you think about it, what is the point of an ad except to make us
unhappy with what we have? So throughout the day, we are
bombarded with messages that stimulate desire, that artificially
create need. Then the same companies that create this artificial
need turn around and justify their products as responding to
"consumer demand."
TM: Did you do any research into how little people
know about where stuff comes from?
AL: I didn't do any particular research on that,
except for talking to everybody for 20 years -- to the point of
ridicule by my friends for constantly drilling them. I find that
most people don't think about the upstream or downstream life of
their products. And they're certainly not going to get that
information from the mainstream media.
This film talks about the fact that the mainstream media
encourages us to buy not only by bombarding us with
advertisements, but also by hiding the true life cycle and
impact of all this stuff we're buying.
TM: What do upstream and downstream mean?
AL: Upstream basically means the extraction and
production -- the item's life before it got into your hands. And
downstream means where it's going afterwards -- the dump or the
incinerator or the third-world village, where it's going to end
up when you chuck it out in the garbage or the recycling bin.
The upstream and downstream life of a product together means its
whole life.
TM: The worst effects on the environment, of course,
happen before and after we use it. So pick a product, and tell
us some of the grisly facts.
AL: Let's pick an iPod or a little radio or something.
These little electronic gadgets have materials from all over
the world. They have toxic chemicals that are produced in some
factory where the workers and the host community were likely
contaminated.
They have metal, which means that there had to be mining, and
there are all kinds of disastrous practices in mining. They have
plastics, which means they're connected to oil drilling. Some of
the social disruptions of these electronic components are really
huge, especially coltan. Coltan is a metal that's mined in the
Congo, and it's used for our cheap and disposable electronics.
The mining and selling of coltan has been linked to funding
civil war in the Congo. So from environmental health impacts, to
the pollution of water, to actual civil war, there's a whole
variety of negative environmental and social impacts associated
with getting and making the stuff that goes into these
electronics.
TM: Are you talking about Democratic Republic of
Congo?
AL: Yes.
TM: The unending civil war there is one of the
grisliest -- 3.3 million dead, the world's most devastating
conflict since World War II, with rape of women used as a weapon
of war. And you're saying part of that is being funded by
materials that are used in an iPod.
Al: That's right. And iPods and other electronics are
loaded with toxic chemicals. That means the production of them
is toxic and the disposal of them is toxic. The European Union
has recently passed legislation to get those toxic chemicals out
of electronics. If you buy an iPod, a stick of lipstick, a
sunscreen or a whole variety of other things in Europe, you're
not going to have these toxic chemicals. But if you buy them in
the U.S., you will. Why is it that European governments are
protecting their citizens more than our government is protecting
us?
TM: One factor is the precautionary principle. I don't
believe it's universal in Europe, but there is a leaning toward
the notion that a new product or a new chemical process or a new
extraction process is guilty until proven innocent. In other
words, "We've gotten along without it so far ... prove that it's
safe before we start using it." Except perhaps at a local level,
we've never been willing to go that route in the U.S. Here, any
convenience, any so-called advance is innocent until proven
guilty -- until you can prove people have been harmfully
affected by it. Sometimes that harmful effect might be
cumulative, might take five or ten years, and might only happen
to infants in the womb. So the chances of the harm ever being
sufficiently researched and proven are small.
AL: Absolutely.
TM: It's not just the stuff that's a problem, it's
also the prices, isn't it? What does it mean to externalize
costs, and what are the hidden costs of cheap stuff?
AL: The term "externalized costs" refers to those
costs of doing business that are shifted to others, so the
producer doesn't have to pay. There are loads of examples in our
current system. For instance, a factory that belches pollution
into a community, causing asthma and cancer, is externalizing
those costs of production onto the community, which has to
figure out how to cover their own healthcare expenses.
Externalizing costs allows company owners to maximize profit
while keeping prices low.
That is why an electronic gadget can be sold for five bucks,
even if its production contaminates drinking water supplies,
makes workers sick and creates piles of toxic waste along the
way. The price tag doesn't include the true cost of making the
item.
TM: Finally, can things be any different? Do you see
signs of hope?
AL: Absolutely! Things can, and must, be different.
Trashing the planet and contaminating communities is not
inherent to doing business and running a society. The things
that are not working in our system didn't just fall from the
sky; they are the result of decisions made by people. And, as I
say in the film, we're people too, and we can make different
decisions.
In communities all over the world, people are opting out of
seeking happiness and self-worth through accumulating ever
larger piles of stuff. There is a revival happening that
includes community organizations, clean production, green
chemistry, green jobs, fair trade programs, etc. These are the
building blocks of a new society, based on sustainability and
equity, that can provide a more lasting happiness than the
fleeting thrills of acquiring the latest consumer gadgets.
Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and
relevant to the story.
We encourage engaging, diverse
and meaningful commentary. Do not include
personal information such as names, addresses,
phone numbers and emails. Comments falling
outside our guidelines – those including
personal attacks and profanity – are not
permitted.
See our complete
Comment Policy
and
use this link to notify us if you have concerns
about a comment.
We’ll promptly review and remove any
inappropriate postings.
Send Page To a Friend
In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed without profit to those who have
expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational
purposes. Information Clearing House has no
affiliation whatsoever with the originator of
this article nor is Information ClearingHouse
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)
|